About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
MSNBCW 43
CNNW 30
FOXNEWS 26
MSNBC 26
CNN 17
FBC 8
KNTV (NBC) 5
KGO (ABC) 4
KPIX (CBS) 4
WJLA 4
WBAL (NBC) 3
CNBC 2
CSPAN 2
WETA 2
WMAR (ABC) 2
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 216
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 216 (some duplicates have been removed)
story. this is backlash on capitol hill. this is criticism of the u.n. ambassador susan rice. it is now heating up as she meets with more republicans and faces more questions. we're going to have a live report up next. [ male announcer ] where do you turn for legal matters? maybe you want to incorporate a business. or protect your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like the help of an attorney. at legalzoom a legal plan attorney is available in most states with every personalized document to answer questions. get started at legalzoom.com today. and now you're protected. i'm going to dream about that steak. i'm going to dream about that tiramisu. what a night, huh? but, um, can the test drive be over now? head back to the dealership? [ male announcer ] it's practically yours. but we still need your signature. volkswagen sign then drive is back. and it's never been easier to get a passat. that's the power of german engineering. get $0 down, $0 due at signing, $0 deposit, and $0 first month's payment on any new volkswagen. visit vwdealer.com today. part of a whole new line of ta
. >> the president responds to questions about susan rice -- >> about the benghazi attacks. >> senator mccain and senator graham want to go after somebody, they should go after me. >> former cia director david petraeus will testify before the senate intelligence committee. >> general petraeus had an affair with his biographer. people are snapping up copies of the book. >> it's so pathetic. >> the book is available in hard cover and extremely hard cover. >>> today on an i'm sorry i lost conference call with top campaign don't oorors, mitt rom said the president won the election because he game african-american and latino voters, quote, gifts. abc news has this audio. >> what the president's campaign did was focus on certain members of his base coalition, give them extraordinary financial gifts from the government and then work very aggressively to turn them out to vote. >> romney also said that the president's campaign focused on giving targeted groups a big gift so he made a big effort on small things. those small things, by the way, add up to trillions of dollars. he said the president f
parts of the community? >> but does this, would this give-- what does it mean for, say, susan rice and the administration then? is this, does this help them politically by shielding them or does petraeus here saying i thought it was a terrorist attack, does that mean this puts, for example, susan rice's statements more up to scrutiny? >> well, i think answers the fundamental question, did they deliberately mislead on this case for political reasons because they were driving the narrative that al-qaeda had been decimated and the war, war was receding or a question of incompetence. neither of those two things is good for the administration although it's after the election, so, they can get the consequences. >> let's take a look at the president talking about susan rice, the u.n. ambassador who many think he will nominate to succeed hillary clinton as secretary of state. >> for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. >> paul:
about susan rice. she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i've said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation, is outrageous. and you know, we're after an election now. i think it is important for us to find out exactly what happened in benghazi, and i'm happy to cooperate in any ways that congress wants. we have provided every bit of information that we have and we will continue to provide information and we've got a full-blown investigation. and all that information will be disgorged to congress. and i don't
've been told the cia had been telling susan rice? >> i think the real problem for general petraeus in this story is that it not only does not mesh with what the white house was saying, it doesn't mesh with what we're told general petraeus said in the immediate aftermath, where he is said to have talked about a spontaneous flash mob. >> to members of congress. >> to members of congress behind closed doors as well and this is the problem. it's not only that we know that that's not true now, it's that at the time there were a lot of other indications that indicate that was not true, denied by the libyan prime minister, the cia station chief called it an act of terror. we had the fbi and i believe the national center for counterterrorism also giving briefings. >> paul: that's right. >> saying this. why was general petraeus's testimony then so at odds with other parts of the community? >> but does this, would this give-- what does it mean for, say, susan rice and the administration then? is this, does this help them politically by shielding them or does petraeus here saying i thought it
. >> the american people deserve to know the facts. we cannot ever let this happen again. >> why would susan rice not get our vote? i don't trust her. >> defending susan rice. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. >> there are no barriers to sitting down and beginning to work through this process. >> as the fiscal cliff loans, is there a deal in the works? mitt romney explains why he lost. >> the president's campaign focused on certain members of his base coalition, give them extraordinary financial gifts from the government, and worked very aggressively to turn them out to vote. captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> well, i just don't know where to begin this week. do we talk about republican charges of a cover-up with regard to the attack in benghazi? do we talk about sexual liaisons and e-mails? to talk about israel and gaza, the possibility of the fiscal cliff? let's start with the sex. [laughter] cia director resigns after the fbi uncovers e-mails showing that general david petraeus had an extrama
namely john mccain and lindsey graham for the criticism leveled at susan rice. the u.n. secretary, shortly after the attacks that resulted in the death of four americans, she went on "meet the press" and other sunday shows and said what happened in benghazi was the result of a spontaneous protest that morphed in to something else and resulted in the death of those americans. republicans attacking ever since. but now, as susan rice's name floated as a successor to hillary clinton as secretary of state, mccain and graham taken out after susan rice. that, no question about it, it came from the heart and raised the ire of president obama. here's what he had to say. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence she had received and to -- to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. when they go after the u.n. ambassador, apparently because they th
. and that if you nominate susan rice for secretary of state, they will do everything in their power to block her nomination. as senator graham said, he simply doesn't trust ambassador rice after what she said about benghazi. i would like your reaction to that and would those threats deter from making a nomination like that? >> first of all, i'm not going to comment at this point on various nominations that i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the succeecond term. those are things that are still being discussed. but let me say specifically about susan rice. she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i've said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothin
you the bizarre ending to an interview today. >>> and big news tonight. ambassador susan rice will meet face-to-face with john mccain tomorrow. >>> plus, he's the wrong with everything wrong with politics in america and now donald's kids know it. what happened in the trump political intervention? >>> and we'll tell you what joe biden is doing in this picture. you're watching "politicsnation" on msnbc. there are patients who will question, why does my mouth feel dryer than i remember it to be? there are more people taking more medication, so we see people suffering from dry mouth more so. we may see more cavities, bad breath, oral irritation. a dry mouth sufferer doesn't have to suffer. i would recommend biotene. the enzymes in biotene products help supplement enzymes that are naturally in saliva. biotene helps moisten those areas that have become dry. those that are suffering can certainly benefit from biotene. >>> what did the gop learn from that devastating election defeat? not enough. in some places they just picked up where they left off before the election. that's next. >
nominate susan rice as secretary of state they will do everything to block the nomination and senator graham said he doesn't trust her after benghazi. i would like your reaction to that and would those threats deter you from making a nomination like that? >> at this point i won't comment on various nominations i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the second term. those are thing that is are still being discussed. but let me say specifically about susan rice. she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i've said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence she had r
they're troubled by what the united nations ambassador susan rice is telling them. and now the acting cia director has some serious problems as well. president obama pulls out all the stops to keep middle class taxes low, but will congress go along with higher taxes for the rich? plus, a long secret u.s. plan, get this, to explode an atomic bomb on the moon. what were they thinking? i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> today we may be at the tipping point for one of the most important decisions president obama needs to make as he begins his second term. on capitol hill republicans including moderate republicans are sending the president a clear warning, don't nominate susan rice to replace hillary clinton as secretary of state. rice is the current u.s. ambassador to the united nations. she spent a second day meeting with senators trying to explain some of her inaccurate comments she made after the september 11th terrorist attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. cnn's senior congressional correspondent dana bash is joining us now from capitol hill with the ver
the politicization of a public statement that was put out by the entire intelligence committee, which susan rice on the 16th, who was asked to go before the people and use that statement, did. i have read every one of the five interviews she did that day. she was within the context of that statement. and for this, she has been pillaried for two months. i don't understand it. it has to stop. if it continues, it's going to set up once again a partisan divide in these -- the house and the senate, which congressman rogers and i have tried to overcome and have overcome with some success with respect to the intelligence committees. >> congressman rogers, to my understanding, talking to government officials, is that what susan rice said on "meet the press" five days after the attack and other programs as well, was very similar to what then director petraeus said privately on september 14, that there appeared to be a terrorist element to it but that it appeared first to be spontaneous but it became a terrorist attack, and that that was his belief. so were they not speaking basically in the same way? >>
big breaking news. susan rice has another meeting scheduled to start right about now on capitol hill. this team she's meeting with connecticut senator joseph lieberman. earlier rice and aktding cia director mike morrell met with john mccain, lindsey graham and kelly ayotte over what rice knew the in the days after the deadly consulate attack in benghazi. all three claim to be more troubled after this meeting. >> we're significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn't get. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed now than i was before that the 16th september explanation about how four americans died by ambassador rice, i think, does not do justice to the reality at the time. >> clearly the impression that was begin, the information begin to the american people was wrong. in fact, ambassador rice said today, absolutely, it was wrong. >> and within the past hour the white house once again defended ambassador rice. >> focus on some might say obsession made on comments made on sunday shows seems, to me, and to many, to be misplaced. >> and the ambassador her
blame game that drew the president's ire, defending susan rice after comments by republican senators john mccain and lindsey graham that they would oppose her nomination to be secretary of state based on remarks she made about the benghazi attacks. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence she had received, and to besmerch her reputation is outrageous. >> indeed. let's get to our panel julian epstein, lynn sweet, washington bureau sweet for chicago "sun-times" and msnbc political analyst professor michael eric dyson of georgetown university. professor dyson,fy might begin with you, perhaps the most hated moment in that press conference was the president's barely concealed anger that republicans have been attacking ambassador susan rice for the confusion surrounding the benghazi consulate attacks. this, as you know, has been the drum beat from republicans from the right wing media for
in the wall street journal, referring to susan rice going to capitol hill yesterday to meet with senators john mccain, lindsey graham, kelly ayotte. she will be back up there today to meet with other senators. the deadline from yesterday's meetings is that those three are still not satisfied. kelly ayotte says she will try to block the conversation of susan rice or another nominee to succeed the departing secretary of state clinton until more information is given on the benghazi attacks in libya. also, france to go in favor of bid.tinians's u.n. the french government said it would vote in favor of the palestinians ' bid of non- member status. how would you fix your school system? we have a couple minutes left. larry in jackson, mississippi, independent. caller: good morning. newly appointed superintendent, i met with yesterday. we have 30,000 students and 2000 are homeless. 70% of our schools in the city, i visited alternative schools where we had the bus driver and security guards running the alternative schools. we have teachers who are failing these students and failed those students' paren
't as many big candidates out there. >> thanks, ari. >> thanks, lawrence. >> the frying of susan rice. let's play "hardball." >>> good evening i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this war in washington. say what you will about the election we just had. this one's hotter, nastier, more personal. one side says it's about character, about whether a close confederate of the president told the truth, the whole truth as she knew it when she went on national television and said the death of a u.s. ambassador was a spontaneous reaction to an anti-muslim video, some trouble-making clown made out in california. ignoring john mccain and his ail argue evidence it was an organized act of terrorism. not so says the president. his u.n. ambassador and close friend simply told the truth as she was permitted to tell it, what the cia gave her to say and no more. for that he charges susan rice, in the words of the new york post, being fried. political fight fans on the tabloids relish this extreme combat what should be a good person's judgment? that's my question tonight. is susan rice now a s
.s. consulate in benghazi and said if you nominate susan rice to be secretary of state, they will do everything in their power to block her nomination as senator graham said, he simply doesn't trust ambassador rice after what she said about benghazi. i would like your reaction to that and would those threats deter you from making a nomination like that? >> well, first of all, i'm not going to comment at this point on various nominations i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the second term. those are things that are still being discussed. but let me say specifically about susan rice, she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. a
back to the president's press conference taking a pretty tough decisive tone on susan rice. and then you look at what's happening -- and also his position on the tax increases. take all of that together, it looks like more of the same. do you think -- do you sense, from your reporting, are we just having people circle each other or are their feet in stone? >> i think there's still some areas where people can move and get to the right place. but, you know, the two things i just keep thinking about is i think the business community, i think, what steve says is exactly right. seems like from the outside what they want more than anything is certain certainty. just moment to moment and minute to minute, it's crisis to crisis. that's an atmosphere not conducive toward optimal economic activity. this notion of trying to get to long-term, as you said, to long-term stability but not having short-term austerity measures that would be too depressed on consumer activity seems like where we need to end up. i think there's going to be a lot of pressure on the business community on republ
the other way. john boldin, not susan rice, would be the hot talk for secretary of state. war clouds would be overhead and the bugles blaring would be marching to iran. just think self-deportation would be the name of the game for immigration. voter suppression would be the toast of the town, or certain parts of town. the extinction of health care would be hr-1, up there on the front burner for congressional action. just think, if the election had gone the other way the rich would be basking in the best tax protection known to man, a real-life, genuine mandate to leave them and their money alone. but a funny thing happened on the way to the white house. people voted for tax fairness. they voted to make the rich pay their share, specifically voted that way for one thing because the republicans kept warning them not to. and so it came to pass today that president obama said just that at his press conference. give the middle class their tax cuts, speaker boehner. cut it loose so they can go christmas shopping, senator mcconnell. it's what the people voted for. that's why they voted for me. th
, therefore, not in the much talked about talking points that susan rice and others refer to publicly where there was a lot more focus on the potential for a spontaneous demonstration, the video, that kind of thing. that the piece of this puzzle that was more clearly known by the intelligence community of the involvement of terror groups was classified. in part that could be argued as a protection required in order to try to pursue them, that kind of thing. that is new information today, and it helps to show us how there might have been two tracks happening all along. the public statements that were reflecting part of what they may have known. the real question is, if they knew it was terrorism all along, was there too much suggestion that a video or demonstrations may have been involved? that's what people see very differently often based on their political point of view. >> yes, and it is based on political point of view. the fact of the matter, the information that susan rice was provided and what she indicated on "meet the press" and other programs, that would have been a part of the de
the u.s. ambassador to the u.n. susan rice, who has been under a lot of criticism lately for the things she said after the benghazi attack in libya. and also with the top republican in the homeland security committee, senator susan collins of maine the republican from maine. we think that meeting might break up any minute while we're in this program live and if it does i'll interrupt what i am doing or about to do hopefully to have a few words with the good senator about how the meeting went. if it was anything like yesterday, ooh, didn't go so well with the senators she met with yesterday. so forgive me if i have to interrupt. i want to go back to the whole thing about office pools. i know a lot of you do this. you get in on these lotto winnings with your friends at work and if you actually win one of the big lotto pools with like oo other best friends at work you have what are you going to do? because one person has the ticket. right? sometimes they say oh, wait. that ticket? i bought that separately. i bought that one at home. that was from my private stash not from my pool. oh, well
was taken out of the final version that we believe was ultimately given to the u.n. ambassador, susan rice. why was that done? who did this? catherine herridge is live on capitol hill. reporter: that's right. congressional horses tell fox news that there were changes to the cia talking points and that language of al qaeda affiliated individuals was replace -- replaced, which have the impact of minimizing or downplaying the role of al qaeda and another group, al sharia come on the consulate on 9/11. there was also testimony this week that the intelligence community to those talking points and went to an interagency process. so that other elements of the intelligence community as well as input and review by the state department, as well as the department of justice, that eventually made its way to ambassador susan rice. no one commissioner who was the final author of this talking point given to ambassador susan rice, who is on the sunday talk show on september 16 and repeated on multiple occasions that meant david was in response to the anti-islam video and that was a demonstration that had
to the united nations, susan rice came under fire from republican senators. senators john mccain and lindsey graham, back at it, trying to trump up the ambassador's role in the benghazi consulate attacks. they took their shots at ambassador rice this morning and the president hit back. >> senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. >> that's loyalty to a staff member. if looks could kill, the president's look would be a cruise missile. it was the most sustained anger, i think it will be the most sustained anger that we have seen and will see coming from this president in a display in a television news conference. now, there is no evidence the ambassador did anything wrong, regarding the benghazi attacks. president obama is not about to let a member of his administration get dragged th
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 216 (some duplicates have been removed)